Writing Your Money: The Missing Manual has been intense. I’ve spent a ton of time researching personal finance topics ranging from buying a car to funding a 401(k) to the relationship between money and happiness. My research has reinforced some of my convictions (index funds are the best investment for 99% of personal investors, for instance) but has toppled others. One of my beliefs that’s been set on its head is that Americans are better off buying their own homes. I don’t believe that’s necessarily the case anymore.
Advantages to renting
In 2007, Tim Ellis shared a guest post with GRS readers about the realities of home ownership. “It’s a real shame when people are driven to get into the housing market because of misplaced notions of imagined financial benefits,” Ellis wrote at the time. I didn’t pay much attention (because I was in London!), but I now believe he’s right. Yes, homeownership makes sense for some people. But there’s no shame in renting; in fact, for many folks, that’s the way to go.
The housing industry is huge, and it spends a lot of time propagating certain myths about homeownership, myths like:
- If you rent, you’re throwing your money away.
- Owning your home is a forced savings plan.
- Home ownership is a path to wealth.
My own research shows that over the long term, housing prices (and gold prices) barely outpace inflation. In fact, since 1926, home prices (and gold prices) have returned about one percent above the inflation rate. That’s hardly a good investment. (Stocks have averaged about 6.8% above inflation!)
There’s no question that buying a house makes sense for some folks, but mainly for non-financial reasons. Owning a home gives you stability (you’re not at the mercy of a landlord) and freedom (you can do what you want with the place). But financially, it’s not usually the best bet. (It’s true that you build equity, but you do so at a very high cost.)
In an editorial in the June 2007 issue of Kiplinger’s Personal Finance, Knight Kiplinger wrote, “It often costs less to rent. The annual cost of owning a property, be it a house or a condo, is usually greater than the cost of renting, after taxes.” And there are other advantages to renting.
For one, you have flexibility; you can move at a moment’s notice. For another, you’re not responsible when things go wrong. If the shower starts leaking before you leave for your vacation in Duluth, you don’t have to worry about it — you call in the landlord.
Still, this is a personal finance blog, so let’s look at some ways to examine the decision to rent or buy in a financial light.
Renting by the numbers
One way to tell whether it’s better to rent or buy is by checking out the price-to-rent ratio (or P/R ratio). This number gives you a rough idea whether homes in your area are fairly priced. Figuring a P/R ratio isn’t too tough. All you need to do is:
- Find two similar houses (or condos or apartments), one for sale and one for rent.
- Divide the sale price of the one place by the annual rent for the other. The resulting number is the P/R ratio.
For example, say you find a $200,000 house for sale in a nice neighborhood. You find a similar house on the next block for rent for $1,000 per month (which works out to $12,000 per year). Dividing $200,000 by $12,000, you get a P/R ratio of 16.7.
But what does this number mean? Writing in The New York Times, David Leonhardt says, “A rent ratio above 20 means that the monthly costs of ownership will exceed the cost of renting.” That’s \a little opaque, but what Leonhardt means is that the higher the P/R ratio, the more it makes sense to rent — and the less it makes sense to buy.
During the housing bubble, the national P/R ratio came close to 20 (and went far above that in some cities). In other words, you could rent a $200,000 house for $10,000 a year (or just over $800 per month), which is a pretty good deal.
The normal range nationwide is between 10 and 14 (meaning it would cost between $1200 and $1600 to rent a $200,000 house). During the 1990s, just before the housing bubble, the national P/R ratio was usually between 14 and 15 (about $1100 to $1200 to rent a $200,000 house).
Another way to gauge the cost of housing is to compare it to your family’s income. From 1984 to 2000, median home prices were about 2.8 times the median yearly family income. (In other words, the typical house cost about three times what a family earned in a year.) During the early 1970s, home prices were about 2.3 times median family income. During the housing bubble, this ratio jumped to 4.2.
These numbers may not mean a whole lot on their own, but they can give you some sort of idea whether housing is overpriced in your area. Plus, it seems safe to assume based on past figures that most families can comfortably afford a home that costs about 2.5x their annual income. (So, if your family makes $80,000 a year, you can afford our theoretical $200,000 house.)
Home sweet home
Despite the results of my research, I’m not about to sell our house. The thing is, there’s more to this decision than just the numbers. As I always say, money is more about mind than it is about math. Our financial decisions have more to do with our psychology than with the numbers.
Kris and I are happy in our drafty old house. We love the vast yard that gives us space to grow a vegetable garden, blackberry canes, and fruit trees. We love the uneven floors, the outdated kitchen (everything’s from 1950!), and the zillions of windows. It may not make the most financial sense, but there’s more to happiness than just money.
We’re not about to move, but you know what? If I had it to do again, I’d never buy this house. If we had stayed where we were, we’d now have just four years left on our mortgage. But knowing what I know now, I might even be inclined to rent. For most folks, renting isn’t a bad option.
Note: This post contains bits and pieces that have been discarded (and some that haven’t!) from Your Money: The Missing Manual. My final manuscript was much, much too long, and we’re going to have to cut a lot of stuff. This makes me sad, but it’s not a complete loss. I’ll be able to share some of it here at GRS!
This article is about House and Home
SEARCH FOR RECENT ARTICLES




Financially renting could be a better option but in my opinion owning a house is much better because when you get old and you are not able to work you will not be able to pay for rent.
loading....
Thak you SO much for posting this! I am a renter, and everyone around us keeps pushing us to get into our own house because we’re “throwing away money” every month. The fact of the matter is, we have not even been married for two years yet, and my husband is still in school. We have no kids, and we want to save our money to put down as big of a down payment as we can afford.
Right now, we’re happy renting, and the bottom line is we can’t afford a house just yet. This post is great because it’s honest.
loading....
If I focused only on financial reasons, it still is better to buy than rent in my area. While paying rent, my husband and I were “lucky” to find a 1200 square foot house with no yard for $800/month. Similar properties rent for around $1000-$1300/month, but the owner lived out of country and mostly just wanted the house to remain occupied. We bought a house awhile ago that is perfect for our needs and is 2300 square feet, well taken care of, updated, and with a decent sized yard for the area and a 2 car garage (unheard of in my area, many houses have NO parking even out front). And even better, our mortgage, house insurance, life insurance, property taxes, garbage & sewer cost us $649/month. Yes, $151 cheaper than rent, minus hassle of landlords, inability to make changes to the house, rising rent rates, and plus the fact that in 17 years (we chose a 20 year mortgage) we will never have to pay rent again, only property taxes and garbage/sewer once per year. I agree that some people work better with flexibility of renting, but both my husband and I have family in my town so we have roots here and plan to stay. I also get that not everyone is able to find a mortgage payment lower than rent so they’re in a financially different state than me. In regards to utilities, they were not included in the $800 rent, and are cheaper in the house I own b/c of better windows. In regards to repairs, I am lucky to have family that are electricians, plumbers, carpenters, so that cuts costs a lot, though I realize I am fortunate to get free labour and most should think about how the cost of repairs could affect how much cheaper buying than renting is. good luck anyway you choose to live and where. I think the top reason for buying for me was 30% financial and 70% stability (I wanted to own a place before I had children, etc).
loading....
Glad it worked out for you. My personal views are that you should buy a house because it is the best decision for you, not because someone say’s it’s a good investment, or what you MUST do. When the decision is between buying a house and renting a house in an area you plan to stay in, buying often wins out. If the choice is between renting a small apartment or buying a house, renting often wins out. When I first moved into the general area I live in now, I had enough money for a down payment on a house. this was back in 1998 or so. House prices were very low, as were interest rates. I was not sure of the exact area that I wanted to live in. By the time I had decided, the house prices had gone WAY up. In one year I saw some of the houses I had looked at listing for TWICE what they had been. They are still way higher than when I was looking so if I had bought right away, I would have done quite well. But I would not have been happier.
I invested my downpayment in a stock based mutual fund. I calculated how much a house would cost me, with insurance, repairs, loan etc. Then I took that much money out of my pay check. Of this money, what was not used for apartment costs went into the fund. When house prices went up the next year, I increased the amount, but increased the amount only a little through the years after that. I can now buy a house using that fund.
For those that are not sure whether they want a house now, or are not sure where they will end up, this is a good strategy. It also helps you figure out whether you can really afford the kind of house you thought you wanted. Each area is different, and lots of conventional wisdom is wrong or outdated.
It used to bug the heck out of me when people would say I needed to buy a house “for the deduction”. I calculated out the amount that I could have deducted, and it came out just slightly more than my standard deduction at first, and would have been overshadowed by the standard deduction in no time.
BTW, I currently rent one side of a duplex. It costs me slightly more than if I had bought a house back a year after I moved to the area. BUT, I don’t have to plow, shovel, cut the grass, fix anything, and if things get tight I can move into a place a quarter the size and be happy, but since I was able to sock away so much I have a lot of flexibility.
I have known people through the years that said they were planning to buy a house. BUT, they move into an apartment much larger than they need. They spend every spare cent having fun with no savings towards a downpayment. Some of these people did buy homes, then lost their homes, or got divorced because money became a serious issue. Too few people look forward far enough to prepare properly, and even fewer people look at the present to see what they may be doing wrong.
In my opinion you did everything right for the right reasons. We need more of that in this world.
loading....